Adams, Marcus, ed., 2021. A Companion to Hobbes. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Adickes, Erich, 1895–1896/1970. German Kantian Bibliography. Boston: Ginn; reprint Würzburg: Liebing/New York: Franklin.Google Scholar

Aichele, Alexander, 2020. “Alles schon gesagt? Gottfried Achenwalls Begründung des Naturrechts.” Rechtsphilosophie 6, 325–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allais, Lucy, 2015. “What Properly Belongs to Me.” Journal of Moral Philosophy 12, 754–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allais, Lucy, 2016. “Kant’s Racism.” Philosophical Papers 45, 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aquinas, Thomas, 1485/2002. Summa Theologica. In On Law, Morality, and Politics, 2nd ed., Baumgarth, William P. and Regan, Richard J., eds. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar

Arendt, Hannah, 1963. On Revolution. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar

Arneil, Barbara, 1996. John Locke and America: The Defence of English Colonialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bacin, Stefano, 2020. “End in Itself, Freedom, and Autonomy: The Place of the Naturrecht Feyerabend in Kant’s Moral Rationalism.” In Ruffing, Margit, Schlitte, Annika, and Bordoni, Gianluca Sadun, eds., Kants Naturrecht Feyerabend: Analysen und Perspektiven. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 91–115.Google Scholar

Baumgarten, Alexander Gottlieb, 1763. Ethica. Halle: Hemmerde.Google Scholar

Beccaria, Cesare 1764/1995. On Crimes and Punishments and Other Writings, ed. Bellamy, Richard, trans. Davies, Richard with Cox, Virginia and Bellamy, Richard. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bentham, Jeremy, 1789/1823. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. London: Pickering.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bentham, Jeremy, 1795/1843. Anarchical Fallacies. In The Works of Jeremy Bentham, Bowring, John, ed. Edinburgh: William Tait.Google Scholar

Berdahl, R. M., 2014. The Politics of the Prussian Nobility: The Development of a Conservative Ideology, 1770–1848. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Bernasconi, Robert, 2002. “Kant as an Unfamiliar Source of Racism.” In Ward, Julie K. and Lott, Tommie L., eds., Philosophers on Race. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 145–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bertomeu, M. J., 2004. “De la apropiación privada a la adquisición común originaria del suelo. Un cambio metodológico ‘menor’ con consecuencias políticas revolucionarias.” Isegoría 30, 141–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biester, Johann Erich, 1783. “Vorschlag, die Geistlichen nicht mehr bei Vollziehung der Ehen zu bemühen.” Berlinische Monatsschrift 2, 265–276.Google Scholar

Birtsch, Günther, 1996. “The Berlin Wednesday Society.” In Schmidt, James, ed., What Is Enlightenment? Eighteenth-Century Answers and Twentieth-Century Questions. Berkeley: University of California Press, 235–252.Google Scholar

Bobbio, Norberto, 1979. “Il modello giusnaturalistico.” In Bobbio, Norberto and Bovero, Michelangelo, Società e stato nella filosofia politica moderna. Milan: Il Saggiatore.Google Scholar

Bordoni, Gianluca Sadun, 2016. “Introduzione.” In Kant, Immanuel, Lezioni sul Diritto Naturale, Hinske, Norbert and Bordoni, Gianluca Sadun, eds. Milano: Bompiani, Il Pensiero Occidentale, 7–50.Google Scholar

Bordoni, Gianluca Sadun, 2020. “Vernunft und Freiheit. Das Naturrecht Feyerabend und die Entwicklung des kantisches Moraldenken.” In Ruffing, Margit, Schlitte, Annika, and Bordoni, Gianluca Sadun, eds., Kants Naturrecht Feyerabend: Analysen und Perspektiven. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 7–31.Google Scholar

Boucher, David, 2009. The Limits of Ethics in International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brandt, Reinhardt, 1974. Eigentumstheorien von Grotius bis Kant. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.Google Scholar

Brecher, Martin, Hirsch, Philipp-Alexander, and Klingner, Stefan, 2020. “Göttinger Naturrecht. 300 Jahre Gottfried Achenwall – Eine Einführung.” Rechtsphilosophie 6, 311–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Buckle, Stephen, 1991. Natural Law and the Theory of Property: Grotius to Hume. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Byrd, B. Sharon, 1989. “Kant’s Theory of Punishment: Deterrence in Its Threat, Retribution in Its Execution.” Law and Philosophy 8, 151–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Byrd, B. Sharon, and Hruschka, Joachim, 2010. Kant’s Doctrine of Right: A Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Caranti, Luigi, 2017. Kant’s Political Legacy. Human Rights, Peace, Progress. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar

Caranti, Luigi, 2019. “Kant’s Political Legacy. Replies to Sangiovanni, Williams and Guyer.” Kantian Review 24, 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Caranti, Luigi, 2022. “Kant via Rousseau against Democracy.” In Caranti, Luigi and Pinzani, Alessandro, eds., Kant and the Problem of Politics: Rethinking the Contemporary World. London: Routledge, 33–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Christman, John, 1994. The Myth of Property: Toward an Egalitarian Theory of Ownership. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Colon-Rios, Joel I., 2016. “Rousseau, Theorist of Constituent Power.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 36, 885–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cooper, K. W., 2018. Hobbes and the Natural Law Tradition. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Covell, Charles, 1998. Kant and the Law of Peace. London: MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

D’Entreves, A.P., 1972. Natural Law. London: Hutcheson.Google Scholar

Davies, Luke, 2020. “Kant on Welfare: Five Unsuccessful Defences.” Kantian Review 25, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davies, Luke, 2021. “Whence honeste vive?” European Journal of Philosophy 29, 323–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Denis, Lara, 2001. “From Friendship to Marriage: Revising Kant.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Desan, Christine, 2017. “The Constitutional Approach to Money: Monetary Design and the Production of the Modern World.” In Bandelj, Nina, Wherry, Frederick F., and Zelizer, Viviana A., eds., Money Talks: Explaining How Money Really Works. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 109–130.Google Scholar

Dustdar, Farah, 2001. “Kant und die politische Kultur der Berliner Aufklärung.” In Gerhardt, Volker et al. eds., Kant und die Berliner Aufklärung. Akten des IX. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses, Band 5, Berlin: De Gruyter, 156–165.Google Scholar

Dworkin, Ronald, 1978. Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Dworkin, Ronald, 1994. Life’s Dominion: An Argument about Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar

Edwards, Jeffrey, 2018. Autonomy, Moral Worth and Right. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Flikschuh, Katrin, 2021. “Innate Right in Kant – A Critical Reading.” European Journal of Philosophy 30, 823–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Formosa, Paul, Goldman, Avery, and Patrone, Tatiana, 2014. Politics and Teleology in Kant. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar

Glaser, Julius. 1851. “Vorwort.” In Beccaria, Cesare, Über Verbrechen und Strafen, überzetzt von Julius Glaser, Wien: Tendler & Comp, vii–xxiii.Google Scholar

Gregor, Mary J., 1963. The Laws of Freedom: A Study of Kant’s Method Applying the Categorical Imperative in the Metaphysik der Sitten. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Gregory, Michael, 2021. “Kant’s Naturrecht Feyerabend, Achenwall and the Role of the State.” Kant Yearbook 13, 49–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grotius, Hugo. 1625. De Jure Belli ac Pacis. Paris.Google Scholar

Grunert, Frank, 2005. “Absolutism(s): Necessary Ambivalences in the Political Theory of Christian Wolff.” Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 73, 141–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Guyer, Paul, 2005, Kant’s System of Nature and Freedom. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Guyer, Paul, 2019a. Kant on the Rationality of Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Guyer, Paul, 2019b. “Luigi Caranti’s Kant’s Political Legacy.” Kantian Review 24, 275–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Guyer, Paul, 2020a. “Achenwall, Kant, and the Division of Governmental Powers.” In Ruffing, Margit, Schlitte, Annika, and Bordoni, Gianluca Sadun, eds., Kant’s Naturrecht Feyerabend. Analysen und Perspektiven. Berlin: De Gruyter, 201–228.Google Scholar

Guyer, Paul, 2020b. “Introduction.” In Achenwall, Gottfried, Natural Law: A Translation of the Textbook for Kant’s Lectures on Legal and Political Philosophy. Edited by Kleingeld, Pauline, translated by C. Vermeulen, with an introduction by Paul Guyer. London: Bloomsbury, xiii–xxxi.Google Scholar

Guyer, Paul, 2024. “Perfection and Self-Perfection in Baumgarten and Kant.” In Fugate, Courtney and Hymers, John, eds., Baumgarten and Kant on the Foundations of Practical Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press,159–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haakonssen, Knud, 1989. The Science of a Legislator: The Natural Jurisprudence of David Hume and Adam Smith. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Haakonssen, Knud, 1996. Natural Law and Moral Philosophy: From Grotius to the Scottish Enlightenment. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Haakonssen, Knud, 2004. “Protestant Natural Law Theory: A General Interpretation.” In Brender, Natalie and Krasnoff, Larry, eds., New Essays on the History of Autonomy: A Collection Honoring J. B. Schneewind. New York: Cambridge University Press, 92–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Habermas, Jürgen, 1991. The Structural Transformation of Public Sphere. An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hampton, Jean, 1984. “The Moral Education Theory of Punishment.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 13, 208–238.Google Scholar

Harcourt, Bernard E., 2011. The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hartung, Gerald, 1998. Die Naturrechtsdebatte: Geschichte der Obligatio von 17. bis 20. Jahrhundert. Freiburg: K. Alber.Google Scholar

Hasan, Rafeeq, 2018. “Freedom and Poverty in the Kantian State.” European Journal of Philosophy 26, 911–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hattenhauer, H., and Bernert, G., 1970. Allgemeines Landrecht für die preußischen Staaten von 1794: Gesetzestext und Register. Frankfurt am Main: Metzner.Google Scholar

Heineccius, Johann Gottlieb, 1738/2008. A Methodical System of Universal Law: Or, of the Laws of Nature and Nations, with Supplements and a Discourse by George Turnbull. Edited by Ahnert, Thomas and Schröder, Peter. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar

Herman, Barbara, 1993. “Can It Be Worth Thinking About Kant on Sex and Marriage?” In Antony, Louise and Witt, Charlotte, eds., A Mind of One’s Own: Feminist Essays on Reason and Objectivity. Boulder: Westview Press, 49–67.Google Scholar

Herman, Barbara, 2021. The Moral Habitat. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hill, Thomas E., Jr., 1999. “Kant on Wrongdoing, Desert, and Punishment.” Law and Philosophy 18, 407–441.Google Scholar

Hill, Thomas E., Jr., 2003. “Treating Criminals as Ends in Themselves.” Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik 11, 30–31.Google Scholar

Hirsch, Phillip-Alexander, 2012a. Kants Einleitung in die Rechtslehre von 1784. Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Göttingen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hirsch, Phillip-Alexander, 2012b. “Kant über Recht, Autonomie und Selbstzweckhaftigkeit. Naturrecht Feyerabend als Geburtsstunde Kants kritischer Rechtsbegründung?” In Hüning, Dieter, Klingner, Stefan, and Bordoni, Gianluca Sadun, eds., Auf dem Weg zur kritischen Rechtslehre? Naturrecht, Moralphilosophie und Eigentumstheorie in Kants Naturrecht Feyerabend. Leiden: Brill, 197–228.Google Scholar

Hirsch, Phillip-Alexander, 2017. Freiheit und Staatlichkeit bei Kant. Die autonomietheoretische Begründung von Recht und Staat und das Widerstandsproblem. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hobbes, Thomas, 1651. Leviathan. London: Crooke.Google Scholar

Hockett, Robert C., and Omorova, Saule T., 2016. “The Finance Franchise.” Cornell Law Review 102, 1143–1218.Google Scholar

Höffe, Otfried, ed., 1999. Immanuel Kant: Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hoffman, Robert, 2015. “A New Reading of Kant’s Theory of Punishment” (unpublished dissertation, University of Pennsylvania).Google Scholar

Holtman, Sarah, 2011. “Kant, Retribution, and Civic Respect.” In White, Mark D., ed., Retributivism: Essays in Theory and Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 107–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Honoré, A. M., 1961. “Ownership.” In Guest, A. G., ed., Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 107–128. Reprinted in E. A. Kent, ed., Law and Philosophy: Readings in Legal Philosophy. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1970, 533–548.Google Scholar

Horn, Christoph. 2014. Nichtideale Normativität. Ein neuer Blick auf Kants politische Philosophie. Berlin: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar

Hull, Isabel, 1997. Sexuality, State, and Civil Society in Germany, 1700–1815. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Hume, David, 1739–1740. A Treatise of Human Nature. London: John Noon and Thomas Longman.Google Scholar

Hume, David, 1751. An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. London: Millar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hüning, Dieter, 2018. “‘Die Ableitung des Eigentumsrechts ist jetzt ein Punkt, der sehr viele denkende Köpfe beschäftigt’ Kant, Rehberg und die naturrechtliche Begründung des Eigentums.” In Waibel, Violetta, Ruffing, Margit, and Wagner, David, eds., Natur und Freiheit. Akten des XII. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2375–2385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hüning, Dieter, 2021. “‘Der Anfang des Eigenthums ist schwer zu begreifen’ – Kants Theorie des Eigentums nach der Vorlesungsnachschrift Naturrecht Feyerabend und die Gründe ihrer Revision in der Rechtslehre von 1797.” In Hüning, Dieter, Klingner, Stefan, and Bordoni, Gianluca Sadun, eds., Auf dem Weg zur kritischen Rechtslehre? Naturrecht, Moralphilosophie und Eigentumstheorie in Kants Naturrecht Feyerabend. Leiden: Brill, 250–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hüning, Dieter, Klingner, Stefan, and Bordoni, Gianluca Sadun, eds., 2021. Auf dem Weg zur kritischen Rechtslehre? Naturrecht, Moralphilosophie und Eigentumstheorie in Kants Naturrecht Feyerabend. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Huseyinzadegan, Dilek, 2019. Kant’s Nonideal Theory of Politics. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hutcheson, Francis, 1725/2008. An Inquiry into the Original of Our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue. Edited by Leidhold, Wolfgang. Rev. ed. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar

Hutcheson, Francis, 1742/2007. Philosophiae Moralis Institutio Compendiaria, with A Short Introduction to Moral Philosophy. Edited by Turco, Luigi. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar

Hutcheson, Francis, 1755/2005. A System of Moral Philosophy. Facsimile edition, with an introduction by Daniel Carey. 2 vols. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Jacobsen, Mogens Chrom, 2020. “Pursuing ‘the Subjective’ in ‘Subjective Rights.’” Danish Yearbook of Philosophy 55, 40–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Juhnke, W.E., 1974. “Benjamin Franklin’s View of the Negro and Slavery.” Pennsylvania History: A Journal of Mid-Atlantic Studies, 375–389.Google Scholar

Keller, Ludwig, 1896. “Die Berliner Mittwochs-Gesellschaft. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Geistesentwicklung Preußens am Ausgange des 18. Jahrhunderts.” In Monatshefte der Comenius-Gesellschaft, 5.Google Scholar

Kersting, Wolfgang, 1993. Wohlgeordnete Freiheit: Immanuel Kants Rechts- und Staatstheorie. New ed. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar

Kersting, Wolfgang, 1994. “La dottrina del duplice contratto nel diritto naturale tedesco.” Filosofia politica 8, 409–437.Google Scholar

Kersting, Wolfgang, 2005. “Politics.” In Haakonssen, Knud, ed., The Cambridge History of Eighteenth-century Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1026–1068.Google Scholar

Klein, Ernst Ferdinand, 1996. “On Freedom of Thought and of the Press: For Princes, Ministers, and Writers.” In Schmidt, James, ed., What Is Enlightenment? Eighteenth-Century Answers and Twentieth-Century Questions. Berkeley: University of California Press, 87–96.Google Scholar

Kleingeld, Pauline, 1993. “The Problematic Status of Gender-Neutral Language in the History of Philosophy: The Case of Kant.” The Philosophical Forum 25, 134–150.Google Scholar

Kleingeld, Pauline, 2007. “Kant’s Second Thoughts on Race.” The Philosophical Quarterly 57, 573–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kleingeld, Pauline, 2014. “Kant’s Second Thoughts on Colonialism.” In Flikschuh, Katrin and Ypi, Lea, eds., Kant and Colonialism: Historical and Critical Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 43–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Klippel, Diethelm, 1976. Politische Freiheit und Freiheitsrechte im deutschen Naturrecht des 18. Jahrhunderts. Paderborn: Schöningh.Google Scholar

Krasnoff, Larry, 2012. “Voluntarism and Conventionalism in Hobbes and Kant.” Hobbes Studies 25, 43–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Krasnoff, Larry, 2018. “On the (Supposed) Distinction between Classical and Welfare Liberalism: Lessons from the Doctrine of Right.” In Krasnoff, Larry, Madrid, Nuria Sanchez, and Satne, Paula, eds., Kant’s Doctrine of Right in the 21st Century. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 103–123.Google Scholar

Kuehl, Kristian, 2015. “Leibeigenschaft.” In Willaschek, Marcus, Stolzenberg, Jürgen, Mohr, Georg, und Bacin, Stefano, eds., Kant Lexicon. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Kuehn, Manfred, 2001. Kant: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Locke, John, 1690. Two Treatises of Government. London, Churchill; 2nd corrected ed: 1694; 4th rev. ed.: 1713; critical ed., P. Laslett, based on Locke’s personal copy (1698). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967Google Scholar

Loriaux, Sylvie, 2017. “Grotius and Kant on the Original Community of Goods and Property.” Grotiana 38, 106–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lu-Adler, Huaping, 2021. “Kant on Lazy Savagery, Racialized.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 60, 253–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lu-Adler, Huaping. 2022. “Kant and Slavery – Or Why He Never Became a Racial Egalitarian.” Critical Philosophy of Race 10, 263–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lu-Adler, Huaping, 2023. Kant, Race, and Racism: Views from Somewhere. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ludwig, Bernd, 1988. Kants Rechtslehre. Kant Forschungen, Band 2. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag.Google Scholar

Ludwig, Bernd, 2020. “Von der coactio hypothetica zum kategorischen Imperativ: Was Kants Autonomie-Lehre Achenwalls Naturrecht von 1755 verdankt.” Rechtsphilosophie 6, 352–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Machiavelli, Niccolo, 1531/1965. Discourses on Livy. Translation by Gilbert, Allan in Machiavelli: The Chief Works and Others, vol. 1. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar

Maliks, Raidar, 2013. “The State of Freedom: Kant and His Conservative Critics.” In Skinner, Quentin and van Gelderen, Martin, eds., Freedom and the Construction of Europe, vol. 2: Free Persons and Free States. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 188–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maliks, Raidar, 2014. Kant’s Politics in Context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maliks, Reidar, 2018. “Two Theories of Resistance in the German Enlightenment.” History of European Ideas 44, 449–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

von Mallinckrodt, Rebekka, 2016. “There Are No Slaves in Prussia?” In Brahn, Felix and Rosenhaft, Eve, eds., Slavery Hinterland: Transatlantic Slavery and Continental Europe 1680–1850. Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer, 109–131.Google Scholar

von Mallinckrodt, Rebekka, 2021. “Slavery and the Law in Eighteenth-Century Germany.” In Mallinckrodt, Rebekka, Köstlbauer, Josef, and Lentz, Sarah, eds., Beyond Exceptionalism: Traces of Slavery and the Slave Trade in Early Modern Germany, 1650–1850. Berlin: De Gruyter, 137–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

von Mallinckrodt, Rebekka, Köstlbauer, Josef, and Lentz, Sarah, 2021. Beyond Exceptionalism: Traces of Slavery and the Slave Trade in Early Modern Germany, 1650–1850. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Malter, Rudolf. 1990. Immanuel Kant in Rede und Gespräch. Hamburg: Felix Meiner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marey, Macarena, 2018a. “The Originality of Kant’s Social Contract Theory.” In Krasnoff, Larry, Madrid, Nuria Sánchez, and Satne, Paula, eds., Kant’s Doctrine of Right in the Twenty-first Century. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 9–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marey, Macarena, 2018b. “On the External and Normative Character of Juridical Obligations: Why Kant Can Have Both.” In Waibel, Violetta, Ruffing, Margit, and Wagner, David, eds., Natur und Freiheit: Akten des 12. Internationalen Kant Kongresses. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2443–2451.Google Scholar

Marey, Macarena, 2020. “Kant’s Popular Sovereignty and Cosmopolitanism.” Constellations 27, 361–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Marey, Macarena, 2021. Voluntad omnilateral y finitud de la Tierra. Adrogué: La Cebra.Google Scholar

Martinich, A. P., 1995. A Hobbes Dictionary. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Marwah, Inder S., 2022. “White Progress: Kant, Race and Teleology.” Kantian Review 27, 615–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maus, Ingeborg, 1992. Zur Aufklärung der Demokratietheorie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar

Mautner, Thomas, 2013. “How Rights Became ‘Subjective.’” Ratio Juris 26, 111–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meier, Georg Friedrich, 1767/2014. Recht der Natur. Facsimile edition, with an introduction by Dominik Recknagel. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag.Google Scholar

Meiksins Wood, Ellen, 1998. “The Agrarian Origins of Capitalism.” Monthly Review 50, 14–31.Google Scholar

Merle, Jean-Christophe, 2000. “A Kantian Critique of Kant’s Theory of Punishment.” Law and Philosophy 19, 311–338.Google Scholar

Mills, Charles W., 2021. “Locke on Slavery.” In Gordon-Roth, Jessica and Weinberg, Shelley, eds., The Lockean Mind. New York: Routledge, 487–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Møller, Sofie, 2020. “Zurechnung und Rechtsprechung bei Achenwall.” Rechtsphilosophie 6, 388–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mulholland, Leslie A., 1990. Kant’s System of Rights. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Murphy, Jeffrey G., 1992. “Does Kant Have a Theory of Punishment?” In Retribution Reconsidered. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 31–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Murphy, Liam, and Nagel, Thomas, 2002. The Myth of Ownership: Taxes and Justice. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Naragon, Steven, 2006. Kant in the Classroom. https://users.manchester.edu/FacStaff/SSNaragon/Kant/Home/index.htm.Google Scholar

Noodt, Gehard, 1731. “Discours sur la liberté de Conscience.” Translated by Jean Barbeyrac. In Recuil de discours sur diverses matières importantes. Amsterdam. Translation of Gerhard Noodt, Dissertatio de religione ab imperio jure gentium libera. Leiden: Fredericus Haaring, 1706.Google Scholar

O’Neill, Onora, 1989. Constructions of Reason. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Olusoga, David, 2016. Black and British: A Forgotten History. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Orend, Brian 2000, War and International Justice: A Kantian Perspective. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfred Laurier University Press.Google Scholar

Papadaki, Lina, 2010. “Kantian Marriage and Beyond.” Hypatia 25, 276–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Parrish, John M., and Tuckness, Alex S., 2010. “Kant and the Problem with Pardons.” Western Political Science Association, Annual Meeting, March 31.Google Scholar

Pascoe, Jordan, 2018. “A Universal Estate: On Kant and Marriage Equality.” In Krasnoff, Larry, Madrid, Nuria Sanchez, and Satne, Paula, eds., Kant’s Doctrine of Right in the Twenty-first Century. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 220–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pascoe, Jordan, 2022. Kant’s Theory of Labour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pinheiro Walla, Alice, 2014. “Human Nature and the Right to Coerce in Kant’s Doctrine of Right.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 96, 126–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pinheiro Walla, Alice, 2016. “Common Possession of the Earth and Cosmopolitan Right.” Kant-Studien 107, 160–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pinheiro Walla, Alice, 2018. “Private Property and the Possibility of Consent: Kant and Social Contract Theory.” In Krasnoff, Larry, Madrid, Nuria Sánchez, and Satne, Paula, eds., Kant’s Doctrine of Right in the Twenty-first Century. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 29–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pinzani, Alessandro, 2013. “In the Beginning Was the Deed: On the Origin of Property and Society in Rousseau and Kant.” Estudos Kantianos 1, 11–24.Google Scholar

Pinzani, Alessandro, 2017. “Gibt es eine ethische Pflicht, äußerlich frei zu sein?” In Dörflinger, Bernd, Hüning, Dieter, and Kruck, Günter., eds., Das Verhältnis von Recht und Moral in Kants praktischer Philosophie. Hildesheim: Olms, 171–190.Google Scholar

Pinzani, Alessandro, 2021. “Wie kann äussere Freiheit ein angeborenes Recht sein?” In Merle, Jean-Christophe and von Villiez, Carola Frein, eds., Zwischen Rechten und Pflichten: Kant’s “Metaphysik der Sitten.” Berlin: De Gruyter, 79–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pufendorf, Samuel, 1660/2009. Two Books of the Elements of Universal Jurisprudence. Edited by Behme, Thomas. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar

Rauscher, Frederick, 2015. “Did Kant Justify the French Revolution Ex-Post Facto?” In Clewis, Robert, ed., Reading Kant’s Lectures. Berlin: De Gruyter, 325–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rauscher, Frederick 2016. “Editor’s Introduction: Natural Right Course Lecture Notes by Feyerabend.” In Kant, Immanuel, Lectures and Drafts on Political Philosophy. Edited by Rauscher, Frederick. Translated by Frederick Rauscher and Kenneth R. Westphal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 73–80.Google Scholar

Rauscher, Frederick, and Westphal, Kenneth, 2016. “Translators’ Remarks.” In Kant, Immanuel, Lectures and Drafts on Political Philosophy. Edited by Rauscher, Frederick. Translated by Frederick Rauscher and Kenneth R. Westphal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, xxx–xxxv.Google Scholar

Rehberg, August Wilhelm, 1794/2020. “Über das Verhältniss der Theorie zur Praxis.” Berlinische Monatsschrift 23,114–143; Translated as “On the Relationship between Theory and Practice.” Translated by Michael Gregory. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 29, 1166–1176.Google Scholar

Rehberg, August Wilhelm, 1828. Sämmtliche Schriften, 3 vols. Hannover: Hahn’sche Hofbuchhandlung.Google Scholar

Reich, Klaus, 1936/1989/2001. Rousseau und Kant. Philosophie und Geschichte. Eine Sammlung von Vorträgen und Schriften aus dem Gebiet von Philosophie und Geschichte, 61. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck). Reprint: Neue Hefte für Philosophie 29 (1989), 80–96; and his Gesammelte Schriften. Edited by M. Baum et al. Hamburg: Meiner, 2001, 147–165.Google Scholar

Ripstein, Arthur, 2008. “Hindering a Hindrance to Freedom.” Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik / Annual Review of Law and Ethics 16, Themenschwerpunkt: Kants Metaphysik der Sitten im Kontext der Naturrechtslehre des 18. Jahrhunderts / Kant’s Doctrine of Right in the Context of Eighteenth Century Natural Law, 227–242.Google Scholar

Ripstein, Arthur, 2009. Force and Freedom: Kant’s Legal and Political Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ripstein, Arthur, 2017. “Property and Sovereignty: How to Tell the Difference.” Theoretical Inquiries in Law 18, 243–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ripstein, Arthur, 2020. “Finding Right in a Condition of War: 1784 and 1797.” In Ruffing, Margit, Schlitte, Annika, and Bordoni, Gianluca Sadun, eds., Kants Naturrecht Feyerabend: Analysen und Perspektiven. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 229–247.Google Scholar

Ripstein, Arthur, 2021. Kant and the Law of War. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rivero, Gabriel, 2021. “Eigentumsrecht und rechtliche Verbindlichkeit in Kants Vorlesung Naturrecht Feyerabend.” In Hüning, Dieter, Klingner, Stefan, and Bordoni, Gianluca Sadun, eds., Auf dem Weg zur kritischen Rechtslehre? Naturrecht, Moralphilosophie und Eigentumstheorie in Kants Naturrecht Feyerabend. Leiden: Brill, 229–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 1755. Discours sur l’origine et les fondements de l’inégalité parmi les hommes. Amsterdam: Rey. Translated as Discourse on the Origin of Inequality, or “Second Discourse” and included in Collected Writings of Rousseau, 13 vols. Edited by R. D. Masters and C. Kelly. Hannover, NH: University Press of New England (now: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 1757. Abhandlung von dem Ursprunge der Ungleichheit unter den Menschen, und worauf sie sich gründe. Translated by M. Mendelssohn. Berlin: Voß.Google Scholar

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 1762. Du contract social ou Principes du droit politique. Amsterdam: Rey. Translated as On the Social Contract, or Principles of Political Right and included in Collected Writings of Rousseau, 13 vols. Edited by R. D. Masters and C. Kelly. Hannover, NH: University Press of New England (now: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar

Ruffing, Margit, Schlitte, Annika, Sadun Bordoni, Gianluca, eds., 2020. Kant’s Naturrecht Feyerabend. Analysen und Perspektiven. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Rühl, Ulli F. H., 2010. Kants Deduktion des Rechts als intelligibler Besitz. Paderborn: Mentis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sanford, Stella, 2022. “The Taxonomy of ‘Race’ and the Anthropology of Sex.” In Lettow, Susanne and Pulkkinen, Tuija, eds., The Palgrave Handbook of German Idealism and Feminist Theory. Cham: Palgrave.Google Scholar

Satz, Debra, 2010. Why Some Things Should Not Be for Sale: The Moral Limits of Markets. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schaff, K., 2001. “Kant, Political Liberalism, and the Ethics of Same-Sex Relations.” Journal of Social Philosophy 32, 446–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schmidt, James, 1989. “The Question of Enlightenment: Kant, Mendelssohn, and the Mittwochsgesellschaft.” Journal of the History of Ideas 50, 269–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schmidt, James, ed., 1996. What Is Enlightenment? Eighteenth-Century Answers and Twentieth-Century Questions. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Schneewind, Jerome, 1990a. “The Misfortunes of Virtue.” Ethics 101, 42–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schneewind, Jerome, ed., 1990b. Moral Philosophy from Montaigne to Kant. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Schneewind, Jerome, 1997. “Introduction.” In Kant, Immanuel, Lectures on Ethics. Edited by Heath, Peter and Schneewind, Jerome. Translated by Peter Heath. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, xiii–xxvii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schneewind, Jerome, 1998. The Invention of Autonomy: A History of Modern Moral Philosophy. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Schwaiger, Clemens, 2020. “Achenwalls Theorie der Verbindlichkeit. Quellen- und entwicklungsgeschichtliche Erkundungen.” Rechtsphilosophie 6, 337–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sextus Empiricus, , 2005. Against the Logicians. Bett, R., trans. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Shell, Susan, 2023. “Kant on Politics and History: The Later Works.” In Baiasu, Sorin and Timmons, Mark, eds., The Kantian Mind. London: Routledge, 360–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sophocles, , 441BCE/1888. The Plays and Fragments, Part III: Antigone. Edited and translated by Jebb, R. C.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Streidl, Paul, 2003. Naturrecht, Staatswissenschaften und Politisierung bei Gottfried Achenwall (1719–1772). Munich: Utz Verlag.Google Scholar

Timmermann, Jens, 2024. “The Quandary of Infanticide in Kant’s ‘Doctrine of Right.’” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 106, 267–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tomassini, Fiorella, 2023. “Property and the Will: Kant and Achenwall on Ownership Rights.” Kantian Review 28, 297–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Valdéz, Inés, 2017. “It’s Not about Race: Good Wars, Bad Wars, and the Origins of Kant’s Anti-Colonialism.” American Political Science Review 111, 819–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Valdéz, Inés, 2020. Transnational Cosmopolitanism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Varden, Helga, 2006. “A Kantian Conception of Rightful Sexual Relations: Sex, (Gay) Marriage, and Prostitution.” Social Philosophy Today 22, 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Varden, Helga, 2010. “Kant’s Non-Absolutist Conception of Political Legitimacy: How Public Right ‘Concludes’ Private Right in ‘The Doctrine of Right.’” Kant-Studien 101, 331–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Varden, Helga, 2012. “A Kantian Critique of The Care Tradition: Family Law and Systemic Justice.” Kantian Review 17, 327–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Varden, Helga, 2018. “Kant’s Moral Theory and Feminist Ethics: Women, Embodiment, Care Relations, and Systemic Injustice.” In Garavaso, Pieranna, ed., The Bloomsbury Companion to Analytic Feminism. Bloomsbury Academic, 459–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Varden, Helga, 2020. Sex, Love, and Gender: A Kantian Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

de Vattel, Emer, 1758/2008. The Law of Nations. Edited by Kapossy, Bela and Whatmore, Richard. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar

Vogel, Steven K., 2018. Marketcraft: How Governments Make Markets Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Weber, Max. 1926. Politik als Beruf. München: Duncker & Humbolt.Google Scholar

Weinrib, Ernest J., 2003. “Property and Poverty in Kant’s System of Rights.” Notre Dame Law Review 78, 795–828Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth, 1992. “Kant on the State, Law, and Obedience to Authority in the Alleged ‘Anti-Revolutionary’ Writings.” Journal of Philosophical Research 17, 383–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth, 1997. “Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct?” Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik/Annual Review of Law and Ethics 5, 141–194.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth 2015. “Kant: Vernunftkritik, Konstruktivismus und Besitzrecht.” In Travesonni-Gomez, Alexandre and Merle, Jean-Christophe, eds., Kant’s Theory of Law. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, Beiheft 143. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 57–100.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth, 2016. How Hume and Kant Reconstruct Natural Law: Justifying Strict Objectivity without Debating Moral Realism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth, 2020. Hegel’s Civic Republicanism: Integrating Natural Law with Kant’s Moral Constructivism. Oxon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Westphal, Kenneth, 2025. “The Question Answered: What Is Kant’s “Critical Philosophy?” In Bykova, Marina F., ed., The History of Philosophy as Philosophy: The Russian Vocation of Nelly V. Motroshilova. Leiden, Brill.Google Scholar

Whitman, James Q., 2004. “The Two Western Cultures of Privacy: Liberty vs. Dignity.” Yale Law Journal 113, 1151–1221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Williams, Howard, 1992. International Relations in Political Theory. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar

Williams, Howard, 2012. Kant and the End of War. Hampshire: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

van der Zande, Johan, 2010. “Statistik and History in the German Enlightenment.” Journal of the History of Ideas 71, 411–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zöllner, Johann Friedrich, 1783. “Ist es rathsam, das Ehebündniß nicht ferner durch die Religion zu sanciren?” Berlinische Monatsschrift 2, 508–516.Google Scholar